JUDGMENT :

VINAY JOSHI, J.

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties.

2. The petitioner has called in question the legality and correctness of the order in M.A. No. 2145/2013 in O.A. No. 2168/2013, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, Camp at Nagpur (CAT) on 19.01.2018. By said order, the petitioner’s application (M.A. No. 2145/2013), for condonation of delay in filing Original Application, came to be rejected, which is the subject matter of challenge.

3. The facts in brief are as such that, the petitioner was working as an Assistant General Manager, Telecom Department, Amravati with respondent no. 2. The petitioner was nominated as one of the member of the Tender Evaluation Committee (TEC). The petitioner was served with a memorandum of charge on the allegations that he committed irregularities in accepting second lowest tender, thereby causing loss to the ex-chequer. An enquiry was held in which the petitioner was found guilty. The Disciplinary Authority vide order dated 22.08.